Is Jordan Spieth the long awaited next Tiger?

Gee, if I had a dime for every time someone declared so and so is the next Tiger, I'd be retired by now.

I sure hope not. Tiger flamed out at winning majors at age 32. I'm hoping Jordan can be "the next Jack" and win them in his late 30s and 40s.

In all seriousness, I think there's going to be a few guys coming along the next few years that are going to raise some eyebrows and make people think they're the next "great one." One of them is playing this week named Ollie Schneiderjans. Some are saying he's got game just as good, if not better, than Spieth. Patrick Rodgers is going to be a great young star as well. Justin Thomas...and so on. I just think the game is changing a bit to a more younger generation, which is different than Tiger's prime when you had the "Big Five" of Tiger and 4 "30 or 40-somethings."

I too agree about the many young guys coming along. Also, Ollie Schneiderjans is possibly the coolest name ever. I really think Justin Thomas along with Ollie, Beau Hosler and many others could be top flite stars in the future. Though, how many times have we all seen hyped up amateurs and young players not amount to anything? Time will tell.

As for Spieth, I voted no. That is not necessarily a knock against Spieth. I just don't think we will be seeing a player dominate to the level that Tiger did, for a long time. Tiger barely had competition; he was that good and the fields were not up to par of this generation. This new era of golf has too much competition and the game has evolved a lot in the the past 15 years. I have little doubt Spieth along with Rory will be leading this new era of talent. But, to say Spieth is the next Tiger? No way. If he pulls off the grand slam; my opinion will change.

I voted "NO". There will only be one Woody, and if Spieth keeps winning majors, there will only be one Spieth in his era of golf. Woody was the best in his era of golf, just like Jack was in his era  of play.

Makes sense to me.

If this poll waited until JS won the grand slam, the voting result will be pretty clear.   I posted this b/c for all the young phenoms that came and went, his early success is resembling that of Tiger's.   For golf, I sure hope he turns out to be the next great one.   I voted yes for those reasons.   BTW, JS is the only one I have considered as the next Tiger.

I also think Tiger had easier competition than Jordan does. It's not to say Tiger beat a bunch of pansies, but the game is a bit deeper now and the top 50 in the world now is a lot better than it was in 2000, in my honest opinion, just like the top 50 in 2000 was better than it was in Jack's prime. The younger generation is stronger. I just think Jordan's going to have a tougher time winning majors because Rory is out there and Dustin Johnson and Jason Day and some of these other great, young rising stars that are going to continue to elevate the game. But if Rory and Jordan were at the top of their games coming out in 1999, my honest opinion is Tiger wouldn't have 14 majors right now. Those two guys would have picked a few off from him between '99-'08. It's just a lot harder and less room for domination now than in 2000.

It's too early to tell, he has the potential, so does Rory but neither has shown they have the mental strength to dominate over multiple years like Tiger did.  One or both will need to dominate for at least 3-4 years before we can even begin the conversation.

Please tell this to The Golf Channel

It would be a waste of time, they along with the rest of the golf world feel the need to crown a new heir to the throne Tiger has vacated.  If I were them I'd talk up how competitive golf is today and highlight all the young talent that has entered the Tour in the last few years.

I feel like golf is falling down the same hole the NBA did when Jordan retired and they waited too long to promote other players.  It seemed like every week they were trying to force feed us a replacement for Jordan rather than just highlight all the young talent the league had.

I agree to an extent, but no one has had this much success since Tiger's prime. We went through a stretch after Tigers '08 US Open where we had new major champion after new major champion. Now we've actually got two guys who are following up majors and showing flashes of domination. So I think the comparison, while premature, is at least worthy of discussion. However, to my point, I think it's going to be much tougher to dominate in this era than in Tigers era. I think we are being hit and about to be hit with enormous young talent that is going to really challenge and possibly hold Spieth and McIlroy back from being a two-man rivalry like we all want and the game needs.

Despite the parity of today's tour, can Jordan dominate a la the old Tiger?   So far, he has been darn impressive, winning two majors in a row, one in dominant fashion, at so young age.  The margin of victory at The Masters should remind people of what Tiger did.   He also has won two tournaments in a row, something that is rarely done these days.

I don't think he can dominate because Rory is there and the competition is stiffer. But he's going to win a lot of tourneys and majors. Last I checked the guys who won the Masters and U.S. open in the same year turned out to have pretty good careers. I think Jordan at least is surrounded by historic company.

I have no issue with Tiger being curt with the press or the fans. I think some fans can be obnoxious. I also think the press are idiots.

No excusing TW with what he did while he was married.

I doubt Spieth will turn out to be like TW. If the press becomes stupid again he might just keep it to the same PR BS that a lot of athletes say.

I voted no because it's still too early to tell. Ask me again in 3 years after he wins 25% of the tournaments he enters and wins 7 out of 11 majors during a 3 year time frame and doesn't miss a cut  ;)

Just saying, that's all that Tiger did from 1999 till 2002